This entry was posted
on Saturday, February 22nd, 2014 at 00:01 and is filed under Optics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

10 Responses to “TNVC Goes Over The Phokus Research Group Hoplite”

My team originally used the Universal Refocus Ring (RFR) on our NVGs. We changed to the Hoplites when we found the RFRs constantly fell off due to the tabs on the RFR pinch ring being too close to and directly under the tabs on the flip lens. It was just too easy to grab the wrong tabs and find yourself holding the RFR in your hand rather than attached to your NVG. Don’t get me wrong, the RFR actually does well the job it’s supposed to do; it’s the impossibility of sliding it back on the NVG when tactical that caused us to move to the Hoplites. (Yeah, yeah, I know. Training Issue. Still didn’t help much.)

The Hoplites don’t have this problem and also work as advertised. We’re much happier now.

Finally, I can tell what kind of disadvantage will anyone have in case of using aperture reduction device like that. On the 3:07, when the smaller aperture cap is flipped down, you can see the increasing level of visual noise in the picture. More noise @ same picture brightness = more sensitivity of photomultiplier. If the sensitivity can not be increased because of NV device design, you have to use more IR light.

I see a big advantage in being able to focus on near objects, even with the need to use more IR light.

Lockpicking and breachs, medical attention, reading maps and cards,… just flip in the Hoplite, turn the IR light (if needed) and you’re far better than using just white light or trying to feel it with the fingers

That’s just an addition to previous discussions about aperture add-ons for NV devices. In September, SSD posted the MATBOCK Tarsier Eclipse video, and I was wondering, what’s the actual trade-off when you are using lower aperture with NV. Mike Pilotte (unfortunately, I’m not aware, who he actually is) said, that “there is not always a trade off” and his speech was a bit skeptic towards my simple scientific explanation of the light multiplication process.

So, there is a trade-off: visual noise or more IR light required. Is it significant? That’s completely own business of every person who is going to use it.

But anyway, it’s better to be aware of that. Twice smaller area (or 1.4 times smaller diameter) of aperture opening means twice more intensive light required to get the same quality image. It could help to take the proper amount of batteries, for example.

Used it last tour and didn’t like it for a few reasons. First, no hit on Phokus- good work brothers keep moving forward. I did’t like it do to its lack of durability and made the observation too dark when engaged. I also did not like how it locked on the NVGs, to easy to unlock when adjusting my goggles. The concept was sound but it did not work for me. Again no hit on them. Phokus keep moving forward and creating, you still have my support!